Novel Textbook Outcomes following emergency laparotomy: Delphi exercise.

BACKGROUND: Textbook outcomes are composite outcome measures that reflect the ideal overall experience for patients. There are many of these in the elective surgery literature but no textbook outcomes have been proposed for patients following emergency laparotomy. The aim was to achieve international consensus amongst experts and patients for the best Textbook Outcomes for non-trauma and trauma emergency laparotomy. METHODS: A modified Delphi exercise was undertaken with three planned rounds to achieve consensus regarding the best Textbook Outcomes based on the category, number and importance (Likert scale of 1-5) of individual outcome measures. There were separate questions for non-trauma and trauma. A patient engagement exercise was undertaken after round 2 to inform the final round. RESULTS: A total of 337 participants from 53 countries participated in all three rounds of the exercise. The final Textbook Outcomes were divided into 'early' and 'longer-term'. For non-trauma patients the proposed early Textbook Outcome was 'Discharged from hospital without serious postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ grade III; including intra-abdominal sepsis, organ failure, unplanned re-operation or death). For trauma patients it was 'Discharged from hospital without unexpected transfusion after haemostasis, and no serious postoperative complications (adapted Clavien-Dindo for trauma ≥ grade III; including intra-abdominal sepsis, organ failure, unplanned re-operation on or death)'. The longer-term Textbook Outcome for both non-trauma and trauma was 'Achieved the early Textbook Outcome, and restoration of baseline quality of life at 1 year'. CONCLUSION: Early and longer-term Textbook Outcomes have been agreed by an international consensus of experts for non-trauma and trauma emergency laparotomy. These now require clinical validation with patient data.

Anogenital injury following sexual assault and consensual sexual intercourse: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Sexual violence is a grave human rights violation and a serious global public health challenge. Rates of reporting of sexual violence and subsequent passage of cases through the criminal justice system are poor all over the world. The presence or absence of anogenital injury following sexual assault may influence survivors in their willingness to report a crime, and law enforcement officers and jurors in their decision making regarding the laying of charges and/or conviction of offenders. The aim of this systematic review was to compare rates of identification of anogenital injury (AGI) in women following sexual assault and consensual sexual intercourse using the same examination techniques. Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, Medline, Embase and Google Scholar were searched for relevant studies (in any language, with no age or sex criteria) published between February 25, 1993, and February 25, 2023, that directly compared AGI between individuals after either sexual assault or consensual sexual intercourse. Abstracts, conference proceedings, and case reports were excluded. The primary outcome of interest was any form of detected AGI. The Mantel-Haenszel method was used for meta-analysis using random effects modelling to determine the risk ratio (RR) of AGI between sexual assault and consensual sexual intercourse. Quality assessment was undertaken using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale tool. The I2 statistic was used to determine heterogeneity among studies. An I2 >75% was considered high heterogeneity. Funnel plots were used to assess the risk of publication bias, by determining any visually apparent asymmetry. This analysis is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42023402468. Findings: We included 10 studies, accounting for 3165 study participants. All participants were female. AGI was detected in 901 (48%) of 1874 participants following sexual assault and 394 (31%) of 1291 participants following consensual sexual intercourse. Meta-analysis of all included studies demonstrated that the presence of AGI was significantly more likely for participants following sexual assault than consensual sexual intercourse (RR 1.59 (95% CI 1.21, 2.09); p < 0.001). There was a significant heterogeneity among studies and funnel plots suggest that this RR may be an over-estimation. Subgroup analysis including only high-quality studies showed no significant difference between groups. Interpretation: Although AGI was significantly more likely to be detected after sexual assault than consensual sexual intercourse, more than half of survivors of sexual assault have no detectable injuries. The presence of AGI, therefore, does not prove there has been sexual violence and absence of injury does not refute that sexual assault has occurred. Funding: The University of Birmingham.

Establishing a COVID-secure site for elective surgery during the COVID pandemic: An observational study.

INTRODUCTION: Maintaining timely and safe delivery of major elective surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic is essential to manage cancer and time-critical surgical conditions. Our NHS Trust established a COVID-secure elective site with a level 2 Post Anaesthetic Care Unit (PACU) facility. Patients requiring level 3 Intensive Care Unit admission were transferred to a non-COVID-secure site. We investigated the relationship between perioperative anaesthetic care and outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All consecutive patients undergoing major surgery at the COVID-secure site between June and November 2020 were included. Patient demographics, operative interventions and 30-day outcomes were recorded. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine the odds ratio of outcomes according to PACU length of stay and the use of spinal or epidural anaesthesia, with age, sex, malignancy status and American Society of Anesthesiologists grade as independent co-variables. RESULTS: There were 280 patients. PACU length of stay >23h was associated with increased 30-day complications. Epidural anaesthesia was associated with PACU length of stay >23h, increased total length of stay, increase hospital transfer and 30-day complications. Two patients acquired nosocomial COVID-19 following hospital transfer. DISCUSSION: Establishing a separate COVID-secure site has facilitated delivery of major elective surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. Choice of perioperative anaesthesia and utilisation of PACU appear likely to affect the risk of adverse outcomes.

Paediatric major incident triage: UK military tool offers best performance in predicting the need for time-critical major surgical and resuscitative intervention.

BACKGROUND: Children are frequently injured during major incidents (MI), including terrorist attacks, conflict and natural disasters. Triage facilitates healthcare resource allocation in order to maximise overall survival. A critical function of MI triage tools is to identify patients needing time-critical major resuscitative and surgical intervention (Priority 1 (P1) status). This study compares the performance of 11 MI triage tools in predicting P1 status in children from the UK Trauma Audit and Research Network (TARN) registry. METHODS: Patients aged <16 years within TARN (January 2008-December 2017) were included. 11 triage tools were applied to patients' first recorded pre-hospital physiology. Patients were retrospectively assigned triage categories (P1, P2, P3, Expectant or Dead) using predefined intervention-based criteria. Tools' performance in <16s were evaluated within four-yearly age subgroups, comparing tool-predicted and intervention-based priority status. FINDINGS: Amongst 4962 patients, mortality was 1.1% (n = 53); median Injury Severity Score (ISS) was 9 (IQR 9-16). Blunt injuries predominated (94.4%). 1343 (27.1%) met intervention-based criteria for P1, exhibiting greater intensive care requirement (60.2% vs. 8.5%, p < 0.01) and ISS (median 17 vs 9, p < 0.01) compared with P2 patients. The Battlefield Casualty Drills (BCD) Triage Sieve had greatest sensitivity (75.7%) in predicting P1 status in children <16 years, demonstrating a 38.4-49.8% improvement across all subgroups of children <12 years compared with the UK's current Paediatric Triage Tape (PTT). JumpSTART demonstrated low sensitivity in predicting P1 status in 4 to 8 year olds (35.5%) and 0 to 4 year olds (28.5%), and was outperformed by its adult counterpart START (60.6% and 59.6%). INTERPRETATION: The BCD Triage Sieve had greatest sensitivity in predicting P1 status in this paediatric trauma registry population: we recommend it replaces the PTT in UK practice. Users of JumpSTART may consider alternative tools. We recommend Lerner's triage category definitions when conducting MI evaluations.

The BCD Triage Sieve outperforms all existing major incident triage tools: Comparative analysis using the UK national trauma registry population.

BACKGROUND: Natural disasters, conflict, and terrorism are major global causes of death and disability. Central to the healthcare response is triage, vital to ensure the right care is provided to the right patient at the right time. The ideal triage tool has high sensitivity for the highest priority (P1) patients with acceptably low over-triage. This study compared the performance of major incident triage tools in predicting P1 casualty status in adults in the prospective UK Trauma Audit and Research Network (TARN) registry. METHODS: TARN patients aged 16+ years (January 2008-December 2017) were included. Ten existing triage tools were applied using patients' first recorded pre-hospital physiology. Patients were subsequently assigned triage categories (P1, P2, P3, Expectant or Dead) based on pre-defined, intervention-based criteria. Tool performance was assessed by comparing tool-predicted and intervention-based priority status. FINDINGS: 195,709 patients were included; mortality was 7·0% (n=13,601); median Injury Severity Score (ISS) was 9 (IQR 9-17); 97·1% sustained blunt injuries. 22,144 (11·3%) patients fulfilled intervention-based criteria for P1 status, exhibiting higher mortality (12·8% vs. 5·0%, p<0.001), increased intensive care requirement (52·4% vs 5·0%, p<0.001), and more severe injuries (median ISS 21 vs 9, p<0.001) compared with P2 patients.In 16-64 year olds, the highest performing tool was the Battlefield Casualty Drills (BCD) Triage Sieve (Prediction of P1 status: 70·4% sensitivity, over-triage 70·9%, area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) 0·068 [95%CI 0·676-0·684]). The UK National Ambulance Resilience Unit (NARU) Triage Sieve had sensitivity of 44·9%; over-triage 56·4%; AUC 0·666 (95%CI 0·662-0·670). All tools performed poorly amongst the elderly (65+ years). INTERPRETATION: The BCD Triage Sieve performed best in this nationally representative population; we recommend it supersede the NARU Triage Sieve as the UK primary major incident triage tool. Validated triage category definitions are recommended for appraising future major incidents. FUNDING: This study is funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Surgical Reconstruction and Microbiology Research Centre. GVG also acknowledges support from the MRC Heath Data Research UK (HDRUK/CFC/01). The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR, the Department of Health and Social Care, or the Ministry of Defence.

Defence Healthcare Engagement: A UK Military Perspective to Improve Healthcare Leadership and Quality of Care Overseas.

Defence Healthcare Engagement (DHE) describes the use of military medical capabilities to achieve health effects overseas through enduring partnerships. It forms a key part of a wider strategy of Defence Engagement that utilises defence assets and activities, short of combat operations, to achieve influence. UK Defence Medical Services have significant recent DHE experience from conflict and stabilisation operations (e.g. Iraq and Afghanistan), health crises (e.g. Ebola epidemic in Sierra Leone), and as part of a long-term partnership with the Pakistan Armed Forces. Taking a historical perspective, this article describes the evolution of DHE from ad hoc rural health camps in the 1950s, to a modern integrated, multi-sector approach based on partnerships with local actors and close civil-military cooperation. It explores the evidence from recent UK experiences, highlighting the decisive contributions that military forces can make to healthcare leadership and quality of care overseas, particularly when conflict and health crisis outstrips the capacity of local healthcare providers to respond. Lessons identified include the need for long-term engagement with partners and the requirement for DHE activities to be closely coordinated with humanitarian agencies and local providers to prevent adverse effects on the local health economy and ensure a sustainable transition to civilian oversight.

The Downrange Acoustic Toolbox: An Active Solution for Combat-Related Acute Acoustic Trauma.

Frontline military personnel are at high risk of acute acoustic trauma (AAT) caused by impulse noise, such as weapon firing or blast. This can result in anatomic disruption of the tympanic membrane and damage to the middle and inner ear, leading to conductive, sensorineural, or mixed hearing loss that may be temporary or permanent. AAT reduces warfighters' operational effectiveness and has implications for future quality of life. Hearing protection devices can mitigate AAT but are not completely protective. Novel therapeutic options now exist; therefore, identification of AAT as soon as possible from point of injury is vital to ensure optimal treatment and fulfillment of the duty of care. Early recognition and treatment of frontline AAT can maintain the deployed team's capabilities, avoid unnecessary case evacuation (CASEVAC), and raise awareness of military occupational AAT. This will help prioritize hearing preservation, maintain the fighting force, and ultimately retain personnel in service. The UK Defence hearWELL research collaboration has developed a frontline protocol for the assessment of AAT utilizing future-facing technology developed by the US Department of Defense: the Downrange Acoustic Toolbox (DAT). The DAT has been operationally deployed since 2019 and has successfully identified AAT requiring treatment, thereby improving casualties' hearing and reducing unnecessary repatriation.

Violence-related knife injuries in a UK city; epidemiology and impact on secondary care resources.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of knife-related injuries is rising across the UK. This study aimed to determine the spectrum of knife-related injuries in a major UK city, with regards to patient and injury characteristics. A secondary aim was to quantify their impact on secondary care resources. METHODS: Observational study of patients aged 16+ years admitted to a major trauma centre following knife-related injuries resulting from interpersonal violence (May 2015 to April 2018). Patients were identified using Emergency Department and discharge coding, blood bank and UK national Trauma Audit and Research prospective registries. Patient and injury characteristics, outcome and resource utilisation were collected from ambulance and hospital records. FINDINGS: 532 patients were identified; 93% male, median age 26 years (IQR 20-35). Median injury severity score was 9 (IQR 3-13). 346 (65%) underwent surgery; 133 (25%) required intensive care; 95 (17·9%) received blood transfusion. Median length of stay was 3·3 days (IQR 1·7-6·0). In-hospital mortality was 10/532 (1·9%). 98 patients (18·5%) had previous attendance with violence-related injuries. 24/37 females (64·9%) were injured in a domestic setting. Intoxication with alcohol (19·2%) and illicit drugs (17·6%) was common. Causative weapon was household knife in 9%, knife (other/unspecified) in 38·0%, machete in 13·9%, small folding blade (2·8%) and, unrecorded in 36·3%. INTERPRETATION: Knife injuries constitute 12·9% of trauma team workload. Violence recidivism and intoxication are common, and females are predominantly injured in a domestic setting, presenting opportunities for targeted violence reduction interventions. 13·9% of injuries involved machetes, with implications for law enforcement strategies.

Outcomes following penetrating neck injury during the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts: A comparison of treatment at US and United Kingdom medical treatment facilities.

INTRODUCTION: The United States and United Kingdom (UK) had differing approaches to the surgical skill mix within deployed medical treatment facilities (MTFs) in support of the military campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan. METHODS: The US and UK combat trauma registries were scrutinized for patients with penetrating neck injury (PNI) at deployed coalition MTF between March 2003 and October 2011. A multivariate mixed effects logistic regression model (threshold, p < 0.05) was used stratified by MTF location and year of injury. The dependent variable was fatality on leaving Role 3, and the independent variables were ISS on arrival, nationality, MTF nationality, and presence of head and neck surgeon. RESULTS: A total of 3,357 (4.9%) of 67,586 patients who arrived alive at deployed military MTF were recorded to have sustained neck injuries; of which 2,186 (83%) were PNIs and the remainder were blunt injuries. When service members killed in action were included, the incidence of neck injury rose from 4.9% to 10%. Seven hundred nine (32%) of 2,186 patients with PNI underwent neck exploration; 555 patients were recorded to have sustained cervical vascular injury, 230 (41%) of 555 underwent vascular ligation or repair. Where it was recorded, PNI directly contributed to death in 64 (28%) of 228 of patients. Fatality status was positively associated with ISS on arrival (odds ratio, 1.05; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.06; p < 0.001) and the casualty being a local national (odds ratio, 1.74; 95% confidence interval, 1.28-2.38; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Significant differences in the treatment and survival of casualties with PNI were identified between nations in this study; this may reflect differing cervical protection, management protocols, and surgical capability and is worthy of further study. In an era of increasing specialization within surgery, neck exploration remains a skill that must be retained by military surgeons deploying to Role 2 and Role 3 MTF. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Retrospective cohort study, level III.

Survival after traumatic brain injury improves with deployment of neurosurgeons: a comparison of US and UK military treatment facilities during the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts.

INTRODUCTION: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is the most common cause of death on the modern battlefield. In recent conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, the US typically deployed neurosurgeons to medical treatment facilities (MTFs), while the UK did not. Our aim was to compare the incidence, TBI and treatment in US and UK-led military MTF to ascertain if differences in deployed trauma systems affected outcomes. METHODS: The US and UK Combat Trauma Registries were scrutinised for patients with HI at deployed MTFs between March 2003 and October 2011. Registry datasets were adapted to stratify TBI using the Mayo Classification System for Traumatic Brain Injury Severity. An adjusted multiple logistic regression model was performed using fatality as the binomial dependent variable and treatment in a US-MTF or UK-MTF, surgical decompression, US military casualty and surgery performed by a neurosurgeon as independent variables. RESULTS: 15 031 patients arrived alive at military MTF after TBI. Presence of a neurosurgeon was associated with increased odds of survival in casualties with moderate or severe TBI (p<0.0001, OR 2.71, 95% CI 2.34 to 4.73). High injury severity (Injury Severity Scores 25-75) was significantly associated with a lower survival (OR 4×104, 95% CI 1.61×104 to 110.6×104, p<0.001); however, having a neurosurgeon present still remained significantly positively associated with survival (OR 3.25, 95% CI 2.71 to 3.91, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Presence of neurosurgeons increased the likelihood of survival after TBI. We therefore recommend that the UK should deploy neurosurgeons to forward military MTF whenever possible in line with their US counterparts.

Military assistance to the civil authority: medical liaison with the Manchester clinicians after the Arena bombing.

UK Defence Medical Services' personnel have experienced an intense exposure to patients injured during war over the last decade and a half. As some bitter lessons of war surgery were relearned and innovative practices introduced, outcomes for patients impr oved consistently as experience accumulated. The repository of many of the enduring lessons learnt at the Role 4 echelon of care remain at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham (QEHB), with the National Health Service and Defence Medical Services personnel who treated the returning casualties. On 22 May 2017, a terrorist detonated an improvised explosive device at the Manchester Arena, killing 22 and wounding 159 people. In the aftermath of the event, QEHB was requested to provide support to the Manchester clinicians and teleconferencing and then two clinical visits were arranged. This short report describes the nature of the visits, outlines the principles of Military Aid to the Civil Authority and looks to the future role of the Defence Medical Services in planning and response to UK terrorism events.

Comparing the Management of Eye Injuries by Coalition Military Surgeons during the Iraq and Afghanistan Conflicts.

PURPOSE: To compare incidences, ocular injury types, and treatment performed on United States and United Kingdom military service members and host nation civilians within the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts to inform future military surgical training requirements and military medical planning. The United States routinely deployed ophthalmologists, whereas the United Kingdom did not. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of the United States and United Kingdom military Joint Theatre Trauma Registries. PARTICIPANTS: All patients with eye injuries treated at a deployed Military Treatment Facility between March 2003 and October 2011. METHODS: An adjusted multiple logistic regression model was performed using enucleation or evisceration and primary open-globe repair as dependent variables and casualty nationality, location, and the presence of an ophthalmic surgeon as independent variables. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Incidence of eye removal (enucleation or evisceration) or primary repair for open globe injury. RESULTS: Five thousand seven hundred nineteen of 67 586 (8%) survivors or those who died of wounds were recorded to have sustained eye injuries. The most common eye injuries were open-globe injury without intraocular foreign body (3201/5719 [56%]). Adnexal injuries (eyelid lacerations and damage to lacrimal apparatus) were recorded in 1265 of 5719 patients (22%). The odds of undergoing evisceration or enucleation for open-globe injury was highest in host nation civilians (odds ratio [OR], 9.23; P < 0.001), but there was no evidence of a difference between United States and United Kingdom military service member casualties (P = 0.38). The presence of an ophthalmic surgeon (OR, 16.3; P < 0.001) significantly affected the odds of eye removal. CONCLUSIONS: Eye injuries were more likely to have been treated definitively in United States Medical Treatment Facilities (MTFs), reflecting the absence of ophthalmologists in most deployed United Kingdom MTFs. The Iraq and Afghan conflicts were notable for coalition air dominance; the shape of future conflicts may mandate delays in evacuation, which may affect visual outcomes negatively, particularly if primary repair of patients with open-globe injuries is delayed. This study provides evidence to support the maintenance of specialist ophthalmic surgical competencies in deployed coalition MTFs for future conflicts.

Impact of socioeconomic deprivation on short-term outcomes and long-term overall survival after colorectal resection for cancer.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess the effects of socioeconomic deprivation on short-term outcomes and long-term overall survival following major resection of colorectal cancer (CRC) at a tertiary hospital in England. METHOD: This was an observational cohort study of patients undergoing resection for colorectal cancer from January 2010 to December 2017. Deprivation was classified into quintiles using the English Indices of Multiple Deprivation 2010. Primary outcome was overall complications (Clavien-Dindo grades 1 to 5). Secondary outcomes were the major complications (Clavien-Dindo 3 to 5), length of hospital stay and overall survival. Outcomes were compared between most affluent group and most deprived group. Multivariate regression models were used to establish the relationship taking into account confounding variables. RESULTS: One thousand eight hundred thirty-five patients were included. Overall and major complication rates were 44.9% and 11.5% respectively in the most affluent, and 54.6% and 15.6% in the most deprived group. Most deprived group was associated with higher overall complications (odds ratio 1.48, 95% CI 1.13-1.95, p = 0.005), higher major complications (odds ratio 1.49, 1.01-2.23, p = 0.048) and longer hospital stay (adjusted ratio 1.15, 1.06-1.25, p < 0.001) when compared with most affluent group. Median follow period was 41 months (interquartile range 20-64.5). Most deprived group had poor overall survival compared with most affluent, but it was not significant at the 5% level (hazard ratio 1.27, 0.99-1.62, p = 0.055). CONCLUSION: Deprivation was associated with higher postoperative complications and longer hospital stay following major resection for CRC. Its relationship with survival was not statistically significant.

Facial injury management undertaken at US and UK medical treatment facilities during the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts: a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To perform the first direct comparison of the facial injuries sustained and treatment performed at USA and UK deployed medical treatment facilities (MTFs) in support of the military campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan. SETTING: The US and UK Joint Theatre Trauma Registries were scrutinised for all patients with facial injuries presenting alive to a UK or US deployed MTF between 1 March 2003 and 31 October 2011. PARTICIPANTS: US and UK military personnel, local police, local military and civilians. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: An adjusted multiple logistic regression model was performed using tracheostomy as the primary dependent outcome variable and treatment in a US MTF, US or UK military, mandible fracture and treatment of mandible fracture as independent secondary variables. RESULTS: Facial injuries were identified in 16 944 casualties, with the most common being those to skin/muscle (64%), bone fractures (36%), inner/middle ear (28%) and intraoral damage (11%). Facial injuries were equally likely to undergo surgery in US MTF as UK MTF (OR: 1.06, 95% CI 0.4603 to 1.142, p=0.6656); however, variations were seen in injury type treated. In US MTF, 692/1452 (48%) of mandible fractures were treated by either open or closed reduction compared with 0/167 (0%) in UK MTF (χ2: 113.6; p≤0.0001). US military casualties who had treatment of their mandible fracture (open reduction and internal fixation or mandibulo-maxillary fixation) were less likely to have had a tracheostomy than those who did not undergo stabilisation of the fractured mandible (OR: 0.61, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.86; p=0.0066). CONCLUSIONS: The capability to surgically treat mandible fractures by open or closed reduction should be considered as an integral component of deployed coalition surgical care in the future.